TJPDC Technocrat or Trumpeter Swan?

By. Neil Williamson, President

Sean Tubbs of Charlottesville Tomorrow reports in this morning’s Daily Progress that Stephen Williams’ contract as Executive Director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) will not be renewed.  While the Free Enterprise Forum has often questioned much of the TJPDC’s work under Mr. Williams, we wish him only the best in his future endeavors.

Where does the TJPDC go from here?

In selecting its next executive, should the TJPDC Board seek out planning professionals who have rich resumes filled with writing, securing and administering grants?

Should the Board focus on the significant transportation component of the job and look to transportation and transit professionals with a litany of studies and reports under their belt?

Or should this regional planning organization consider seeking out a “Trumpeter Swan” who may or may not have the planning credentials but has a resume filled with assignments that required leadership, consensus building and risk management?

Please let me explain.

The “Trumpeter Swan” moniker is attributed to advertising giant David Ogilvy who in seeking new Creative Directors wrote a space advertisement seeking “Trumpeter Swans who combine personal genius with inspiring leadership – we have an opening for one of these rare birds”.

Such talented individuals tend to be long on world experience and short on academic credentials.  In addition, the most successful trumpeter swans are self aware of their own shortcomings, as such they tend to surround themselves with high level talent without fear of being out shined.  

But the question remains would such a rare bird have an chance of survival in the TJPDC environment?

The safer choice is a technocrat; someone who has worked their way up through the planning ranks perhaps with a smaller region.  Such an individual would know ‘how to play the game’.  This is the lens which was used to select the past two TJPDC leaders.

Which direction will the TJPDC Board go?

Stay tuned.

Respectfully submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Not Inside Baseball – C’ville PUD Opportunity

By. Neil Williamson, President

“When you are provided your opportunity at the plate, make the most of it” – Anonymous Coach 

Later this month (June 25) the Charlottesville Planning Commission will have a work session to discuss potential reforms to the Planned Unit Development regulations (PUD). The Free Enterprise Forum applauds the review of the PUD regulations and hopes to work with the commission to create new flexibility and reward ingenuity while ensuring future PUDs are an asset to the community.

While this may look like inside baseball to many, the reality is this issue is a critical question regarding future economic vitality, employment opportunity and redevelopment potential.

Please let me explain.

It has been said that development is much like water and electricity; it takes the path of least resistance. Therefore those parcels in the city that are/were naturally prime for development due to topography, location or zoning are mostly built out.  The remaining parcels, including redevelopment opportunities, will likely require significant engineering, creative approaches and flexibility of PUD regulations.

What is a Planned Unit Development? According to the Cooperative Extension Service:

Compared to other types of zoning approvals, the PUD process is a flexible application of zoning. Through the PUD approval process, there is often great flexibility in siting and design regulations for buildings and land uses with the PUD project site. Density requirements, setbacks, and building height restrictions may be relaxed, and the mixing of land uses may be allowed in order to improve the design of the project as a whole and its integration with the surrounding community. In return for greater flexibility in the design of planned unit developments, local government zoning ordinance provisions often require the developer of the project to provide public benefits, such as the preservation of open space for public use.

But all PUDs are not created equal.  According to Stuart Korfhage of The St. Augustine Record:

The St. Augustine City Commission chose maximum flexibility over stringent property use standards in its recent revision of the planned unit development (PUD) ordinance.

At Monday’s Commission meeting, commissioners voted 4-1 in favor of a new ordinance that does not severely limit applications for PUDs in the city’s historic district. The commission considered three options in recent months and chose the plan with the fewest restrictions.

The Free Enterprise Forum hopes the Charlottesville Planning Commission June 25th work session produces this kind of deep examination of their ordinance applications.  Frankly, we are concerned with the low level of questions the staff report seems to be asking.

Is this really about reform or merely housekeeping?  None of the staff proposed changes encourage ingenuity or allow flexibility with the subdivision ordinance or design guidelines.

Considering PUDs were designed to provide the opportunity for flexible application of siting and design requirements (see above) we ware dismayed that no parcel under two acres could qualify as a PUD.  While we anticipate most parcels would exceed two acres, it is not difficult to imagine an infill project that might need regulatory relief in order to achieve the community vision.  We suggest that this limitation be lifted.

We are aware of concerns raised regarding the level of transparency regarding PUD applications and the public’s right to review plans.  The Free Enterprise Forum believes such sunlight is good and any formally filed documents should be readily available for public review.  However, we also recognize pre-application discussions with City staff are often required to determine the potentiality of such an application, such meetings should not require public notice.

The Free Enterprise Forum hopes Charlottesville City Planning Commission will make the most of their time at the plate and expand the lens of this PUD review and refocus staff energy on improving PUDs as a tool to get better development.  A refined PUD process will increase the use of the PUD and foster innovative development and redevelopment of the City core.

We stand ready to assist in this important Charlottesville economic vitality effort.  As John Fogerty said, “Put me in Coach; I am ready to play”

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Photo Credits: Free Enterprise Forum

Will Increasing Regulation Increase Prosperity?

FORUM WATCH EDITORIAL

By. Neil Williamson, President

On the national level, President Ronald Reagan famously said, “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it”. 

One has to ask, Do the majority of our elected representative support or oppose this concept?

Just as the leaders of our community are being asked to think big regarding their comprehensive plan goals and objectives, they continue to consider government actions that would demonstrably add bureaucracy, and cost with limited public benefit.

Interestingly, the proponents for this type regulations work hard to use a lexicon that discourages opposition. Charlottesville, the “Human Rights Commission” sounds like something everyone should agree on. It was perhaps because they did not want to be seen as opposing “Human Rights” that a majority of City Council favored adding enforcement language to this politically appointed group. Aaron Richardson of The Daily Progress reports:

“The council on Monday night reached consensus to hold a public hearing on the ordinance that would establish a commission that could investigate, mediate and make judgments on claims of discrimination in small businesses and delegate claims from larger businesses to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. .

… Councilor Kathy Galvin told the council on Monday that she was skeptical of the effect a commission with full enforcement powers could have on local businesses. She added that discrimination is not the only thing keeping low-income residents and minorities out of work.”

The Free Enterprise Forum applauds Ms. Galvin’s persistence on this critical issue. Back in December of 2011, the Free Enterprise Forum asked if you could be in favor of Human Rights and Opposed to the Human Rights Commission.

We said, “the Free Enterprise Forum fears that moving forward with the politically appointed Human Rights Commission, based on its current construct and goals, will do more harm than good for City economic opportunities across all demographic cohorts”.

Couple this with Charlottesville’s tax rates, the newly enacted Stormwater fees, one has to wonder how much more regulatory burden can businesses withstand before looking at space outside the City. 

Things are not significantly better in Albemarle County, where their Planning Commission is considering a number of new overlay zones that will increase complexity, reduce property rights and increase the scope and size of local government.

“Adopt a historic overlay district ordinance to recognize and protect historic, architectural, and cultural resources, including individual sites and districts at the local level.

Expand the authority of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) to include the review required under the recommended historic district overlay ordinance. Revise the make up of the ARB to include members with expertise in historic preservation and revise the name of the group accordingly”.

This is in addition to the Monticello “land grab” vista preservation overlay (note the verbiage change), the new proposed “Biodiversity” inventory and action plan. Clearly there is an undercurrent in government that more control is better government. The Free Enterprise Forum respectfully disagrees.

All of these regulatory hurdles have an impact on economic development and stability.  This morning’s (4/22) Washington Post featured a Sarah Halzack article explaining DC bucking the trend of “Job Sprawl”.  Citing Brookings Institute’s Elizabeth Kneebone’s study showing DC was the only one of 100 studied that had added jobs to its urban core.  According to the article:

“Decentralization of jobs can have either a positive or negative effect on a metropolitan area.  The implications of this shift can depend largely on a region’s land-use policies as well as the quality and reach of its transit system. [Emphasis added-nw]

“Particularly for low income residents, if jobs move further out, if there isn’t reliable transit and they don’t have a car, that could limit their opportunities,” Kneebone said.

This information coupled with the Charlottesville dearth of jobs in the so called “Orange Dot” Report proves economic realities must help shape local policies if we wish to attract and retain JOBS to live in our region.  The concept of economic vitality has been woefully understated during the community discussions regarding poverty, employment issues and property rights.

While we appreciate Monticello’s contribution to the community, we believe they are a private property owner. The Thomas Jefferson Foundation takes great pains to mention that it receives no government support but now is asking Albemarle County to serve as a middle man between the mountaintop and their neighbors. Perhaps the Foundation might choose to use a part of their most recent $10 million dollar gift to directly reach out to their neighbors rather than mandating local government do so.  

While we understand and appreciate the goals of biodiversity, we do not believe this chapter should be the longest in Albemarle’s Comprehensive Plan and we question the need for a Biodiversity Action Plan that virtually deputizes the Natural Resource Committee.

While we remain very concerned with human rights, we are equally concerned that unnecessary red tape will push more businesses out of not only Charlottesville but the entire region. 

While we believe the importance of historic places, we find that property owners, not government, should determine what to do with their property.

If we as a community choose to ignore the significant negative implications of over regulation on business development and retention, the resultant community may not be one you wish to see preserved.  Just as one can ask if the community vision is “Aspen or Austin”, if  these proposals come to fruition a better question may be should Charlottesville be known for Making Products or Making Beds.

Today, we find ourselves at  a tipping point, as the number of government overlays, rights commissions and review boards increase, the economic vitality of the region decreases by an inverse proportion.

Which way will the scale fall?

Stay tuned.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Who’s Responsible for TJPDC Failure To Deliver Million Dollar Planning Promise?

By. Neil Williamson, President

As Albemarle County and The City of Charlottesville continue to move forward on their comprehensive plans, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) effort entitled “Many Plans One Community” is failing to meet deadlines and has lost their project manager.  The HUD funded “Livability Communities” Planning Project continues to disappoint citizens and decision makers alike.

The “Performance Measurement System Report” document was designed to be the first deliverable for the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant (p.4).  The work on this deliverable  was mainly completed from January 2011 to April 2011.  Yet today the draft provided to the public for consideration as a part of Charlottesville’s Comprehensive Plan includes typographical errors and is missing critical information.  Throughout the document are the terms “placeholder” (p.25,26, 26, 28) or “need updated Information from City and County” (p.37)  All of the executive summaries in the March 15, 2013 draft (almost two years since the work was completed) contain Latin placeholders.

A review of the work plan included on the “Many Plans One Community” website indicates that all text was to be completed by January 31, 2013 to coincide with the respective Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan reviews.

The TJPDC process was designed from the outset to improve, not delay, the comprehensive plan process.  In their 2011 media release kicking off the process the TJPDC described the process:

Many Plans, One Community is the portal for information exchange and public input that will inform the updates of the Charlottesville and Albemarle County comprehensive plans, the Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization Long Range Transportation Plan update and the development of a regional Livable Communities Plan. Many Plans, One Community will be a One-Stop Shop for all information about each of these four different plans, as well as a forum for the public to provide feedback throughout the process. It is envisioned that this process will extend limited staff resources and encourage collaboration, facilitate public information sharing and increase transparency across municipal boundaries.

Back in September, 2012 Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Sean Tubbs reported that three “One Community” TJPDC Planners had been let go earlier than planned due to budget overruns:

Two temporary employees of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission hired to help update the Albemarle and Charlottesville comprehensive plans will leave their jobs seven months earlier than expected as money from a $1 million federal grant begins to run out. . .

…“We are anticipating that we will be able to close out the project, complete all of the products

that have been promised both to HUD, the city and the

TJPDC Exec Stephen Williams

county and the MPO within the budget and within the time frames that are proposed,” Williams said.

Then on January 31, 2013 Project Manager Summer Frederick left the TJPDC to return to work for Albemarle County.  The TJPDC media release indicates:

As of February 1, 2013, Mr. Williams, will be the primary point of contact for all project management issues related to the Many Plans, One Community Livability Project.  Mr. Williams may be reached via phone at 434-979-7310 x110, or via email at swilliams@tjpdc.org

After three years and nearly a million dollars, what do the citizens have to show for it?  A litany of meetings, a website, partially completed reports and now TJPDC Exec Williams is taking management responsibility?

One has to wonder has the TJPDC met the terms, objectives and deadlines of the HUD Federal Grant?

And if not, who should be held responsible?

Respectfully submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville.  www.freeenterpriseforum.org

‘Rezoning Ransom’: Repeal cash proffers

This editorial first appeared in The Daily Progress on Sunday March 3, 2013.  The full “Contradictory Consequences” white paper can be found at www.freeenterpriseforum.org under the reports tab.  The Free Enterprise Forum is a privately funded public policy organization focused on local government in the Central Virginia region.

 

By. Neil Williamson, President, Free Enterprise Forum

There are times you have to say no to one thing because you said yes to something else. Such is the case with cash proffers.

If a community believes in citizen vetted comprehensive planning, preserving rural areas by densification of development areas and economic vitality, then such a community must say no to the fatally flawed cash proffer system.

In the recently released “Contradictory Consequences” white paper, the Free Enterprise Forum research and case studies explain the impacts of cash proffers. Sold to the public as a way to make growth pay for itself, the unintended negative economic and planning impacts have caused localities across the Commonwealth to repeal this “rezoning ransom” and replace these funds with more dependable and equitable infrastructure funding options. Today, rather than simply recalibrating their cash proffer calculation, as Albemarle County is doing, full repeal is a much more economically and ecologically sensible and sustainable alternative.

Cash proffers are per unit fees “voluntarily” extracted from applicants seeking to rezone their property. In theory, such “voluntary” proffers would be directly tied to the costs associated with the increased density of a rezoning. In reality, cash proffers lower land values, encourage development contrary to comprehensive plans, and create false hope for outside infrastructure funding.

Lower land values, lower property tax revenue – In concept, cash proffers are voluntary payments made by landowners to mitigate the impacts of changing the prescriptive zoning on their property. The concept works best when the rezoned value exceeds the increased cost of the proffer. Such a symbiotic relationship is difficult to achieve with automatic inflation increasing cash proffers and fickle housing markets not keeping pace.

Albemarle	Single Family Detached $19,753Townhouse $13,432Multi Family $13,996
Charlottesville	No cash proffers
Greene	$5,778 per unit
Fluvanna	$6,577 per unit
Louisa	$4,362 per unit
Nelson	No cash proffers

Basic economic theory indicates any increased cost must be paid by an entity that is a part of the transaction. Many believe the increased cost of a cash proffer will be borne by the end user, the new homebuyer. This can only occur in a housing market that has constant upward motion.

If, due to market conditions, the end user is not available to accept the cost of the cash proffer it is the land owner, whose land will be discounted by the increased entitlement costs that cash proffers create. In turn, such reduced land values reduce the locality’s real estate tax assessed value and revenue (absent an increase in the tax rate).

‘By Right’ Development Encouraged Charlottesville and Albemarle are currently updating their State mandated comprehensive plans. These community vetted plans suggest the manner in which the locality wishes to grow in the next twenty years.

In many, if not most, cases the zoning in a locality’s development area does not match the comprehensive plan designation. While the property owner does not have to agree to the comprehensive plan changes, they cannot act on those new designations until they have rezoned the property. Alternatively, if the land owner chooses to move forward with the existing, some might call “stale”, zoning, which likely does not agree with the locality’s comprehensive plan, they can do so immediately without paying any cash proffers.

In 2011, a developer acquired the rights to a project that included property in The City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Charlottesville does not have a cash proffer, while Albemarle’s exceeds $19,000 per single family home. After calculating the increased value of the land with the rezoning in each locality, the developer chose to rezone the property that was in the City (without cash proffers) and chose NOT to rezone the property in the county. This calculated decision was based on calculation of the cost (in money and time) of rezoning the County land exceeded the increase value.

Therefore, the land owner is incentivized to not to follow the community vetted comprehensive plan vision but instead to construct lower density, less thoughtfully designed developments. These projects are built to meet local building and zoning code but absent the enhancements and flexibility a rezoning might allow.

False Financial Hope – Forecasting cash proffer revenue is much like predicting snow in Central Virginia, localities do not know when it is coming, how much they are actually going to get or when it will stop. Cash proffers rarely, if ever, total the amounts localities are banking on.

In November 2012, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors was presented a staff report outlining cash proffers that were in excess of $49.3 million dollars quite literally off the chart.

As one looks at this chart (right) and sees almost $50 Million dollars proffered, one might anticipate the cash proffer program is answering the very need it was designed but the Free Enterprise Forum estimates at least 28% of those proffers will never be collected as they are associated with the now defunct Biscuit Run Development.

It is interesting that while the State of Virginia acquired the property for a state park on December 31, 2009, Albemarle County continued to calculate those proffers as receivable in November 2012.

Rural Areas Jeopardized – According to the Piedmont Environmental Council, Albemarle County has in excess of 10,000 units already rezoned for residential development. Why have these not moved forward?

Have the embedded costs of development in Albemarle County, including cash proffers, created a cost burden the market is unable to bear?

If growth trends continue, won’t these embedded costs push residential development out of Albemarle County’s designated growth areas and into the rural areas?

The reality is that cash proffers contribute to the paradigm that rural residential development remains the least expensive, most profitable development option in Albemarle County.

If the cash proffers are pushing development into the rural areas and surrounding localities, what are the community costs of increased traffic, more costly government services delivery, as well as loss of ecologically contributing farmland, and productivity?

Cash proffers have produced a plethora of Contradictory Consequences without achieving significant benefit. Now is the time to repeal this rezoning ransom and replace it with a more sensible and equitable alternative.

Neil Williamson is the President of the Free Enterprise Forum, a local government public policy organization located in Charlottesville. The full Contradictory Consequences report can be found at www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Population Growth Report or Manifesto?

By. Neil Williamson, President

This morning’s Daily Progress included an article outlining a report written by Craig Evans considering the fiscal costs and benefits of growth.  This report is underwritten by a local population control advocacy group, Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population (ASAP).  The Free Enterprise Forum was contacted by the paper and asked to provide comment.  Brian Wheeler quotes us accurately in the well written article.  Below is the entirety of our statement on the issue of this troubled “report”.

The Free Enterprise Forum believes the Evans report while seemingly accurate in its limited financial analysis fails to recognize the indirect, but calculable, economic benefits of population expansion. The Free Enterprise Forum is concerned the “Counting the Costs and Benefits of Growth Analysis” report by Craig Evans is flawed in design and unfairly prejudiced in its analysis and conclusions.

Much of the Evans report reads significantly more like a political manifesto rather than an academic thesis. Using such terms as “Race to the Bottom” and describing developers as “Speculative Enterprises” do not add to the academic credibility of the report and fails to recognize developers as the very businesses who take the financial risk to bring the community’s comprehensive plan to life.

Taken at face value, the Evans report indicates that the County and City lose roughly $.25 for every dollar collected in residential tax revenue. In FY2011, the City posted a $3.8 Million dollar surplus. How is that possible?

According to NBC29, “The [FY2011] surplus came from a couple of different places. First, the city saved money during the last fiscal year when expenses came in $2.9 million under budget. On top of that, the city collected $900,000 more revenue than expected in 2012 – largely from a spike in sales, meals and lodging taxes”. Only by recognizing the indirect benefit of and important symbiotic relationship between population and revenue producing commercial activities can you reconcile this anomaly.

The Evans report fails to calculate the considerable value of population to economic vitality. It is established that “Retail follows Rooftops” and revenue follows retail. One need only look to Greene County’s recent increase in retail square footage that followed the residential expansion. In addition the retail sales tax local option has increased exponentially in Greene County since the establishment of the retail centers.

In its most telling omission, the Evans Report fails to recognize that every locality in the state must produce a balanced budget. Property Taxes are set by elected officials after consideration of ALL revenue sources. While the property taxes generated by individual homeowners may not cover Evans cost calculations, these same citizens generate the economic activity [sales tax, commercial tax, machine/tool taxes] that allows the locality to keep property taxes lower because of commercial activity.

One thrust of the Evans report is that growth comes with costs. Taken in isolation this is a true statement but when one considers the economic opportunities and advancements such growth also provides.

The Evans report cites Loudoun County as an example of rampant growth and it is true their government spending has accelerated significantly to meet the needs of their community. At one point Loudoun was building a high school a year to keep up with growth in student population. Late last year, Loudoun County was named by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey as the county with the highest median income per household in the nation. With a median income of more than $119,000, Loudoun households generate almost twice the income than Albemarle households. Yes, there is a cost to growth but the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Paraphrasing Aaron Levenstein, “Statistics are like bikinis. While what they reveal is suggestive, what they conceal is vital”.

Respectfully Submitted

Neil Williamson, President

————————————————————

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson County.  For more information visit the website www.freeenterpriseforum.org

Should Charlottesville Survey Seek Citizen Input?

By. Neil Williamson, President

Once again the Charlottesville City Council has issued their annual tax survey asking residents how they should prioritize their spending decisions for the upcoming budget cycle. 

Annually, this survey gives the Free Enterprise Forum post Thanksgiving heartburn.  As we suggested regarding the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) survey, any such instrument is only as valuable as the respective cohort who responds.  Unlike the TJPDC survey, it does go out to all city residents (via utility billing).  It is understood that all who receive the instrument will not fill it out and those who do fill it out could also fill it out online and fax in an additional response.

To be clear, the Free Enterprise Forum firmly endorses the city’s vision for citizen involvement:

our decisions are informed at every stage by effective communication and active citizen involvement. Citizens feel listened to and are easily able to find an appropriate forum to respectfully express their concerns.

But, we also believe such surveys provide an “easy way out” for councilors who are simply looking to determine which way the wind is blowing.  Just as elections should be about choices of different perspectives (which Charlottesville has lacked for some time), budgets should also be about informed choices and decisions.

Understanding that these decisions have consequences, we are appreciative of the concept behind the last three survey questions:

13. You support City services through a portion of real estate, personal property, sales and other taxes and user fees. Considering all of our City services on the one hand, and taxes on the other, which of the following statements is closest to your view?

• I believe we should decrease taxes and services (if chosen, go to Q14)
• I want to keep taxes and services where they are
• I believe we should increase taxes and services (if chosen, go to Q15)

14. If you feel services should be decreased, which services should be decreased?

15. If you feel services should be increased, which services should be increased?

The Free Enterprise Forum is appreciative of being asked to voice our opinion but this is not a true democracy.  As a republic, we elect folks to make these decisions, if we do not like the decisions they make, we have the opportunity to remove them. 

So should Charlottesville citizens fill out the survey?  The short answer is Yes. 

The longer answer is the same as we gave for the TJPDC survey:

So now the Free Enterprise Forum finds itself between a philosophical rock and a hard place; do we encourage participation in a survey that has flawed methodology or sit on the sidelines Monday morning quarterbacking?

After significant thought time, we are encouraging everyone to fill out the survey.

After City staff tabulates the responses, we challenge the City Council to accept the inherently flawed survey data as one of the many pieces of information to be used to evaluate the FY2014 budget.

That’s the reason City  Council was elected, to make decisions, not conduct surveys.

Respectfully Submitted

Neil Williamson, President

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.

What’s Three Thousand Hours Worth to You?

By. Neil Williamson, President

In our almost ten years of operation of the Free Enterprise Forum, it is conservatively estimated we have attended almost 3,000 hours of local government meetings.  Some of these meetings have been well attended with wide media coverage and others where we have been the only person in the audience.

Our alphabet soup of regular attended local government meetings includes, but is not limited to: ACARB, ACPC, ACBOS, CBAR, CCC, CPC, FCBOS, FCPC, GCBOS, GCPC,  LCBOS, LCPC, MPO, PACC, RSWA, RWSA, TJPDC.  Extra points to anyone who can correctly name all the acronyms. 

Why do we go to so many meetings? – so you don’t have to.

Time is money and you don’t have time to get up to speed on all the issues of each locality and attend their respective meetings — but you need to know what happened and how it impacts you and your enterprise.  As the James Taylor song says “That’s Why I’m Here”.

It is important to recognize that we not only attend we participate.  Our regular attendance at these meetings provides elected officials and staff an understanding of our commitment to these issues.  Our pro business policy perspective has directly impacted the regulatory environment in every locality we serve.

This year, I was floored to be named “Citizen Planner Of the Year” By the City of Charlottesville Planning Commission.  We are making a difference!

So I have to ask – How much is Three Thousand Hours worth to you?

The Free Enterprise Forum is a 501(c) 6 organization that relies on contributions from organizations, businesses and individuals to maintain operations. 

As we approach the end of the year, we have not yet met our 2012 fundraising target.

Put ever so bluntly, will you put your money where my mouth is?

Please click here for our secure server donation page!

Only with your support will the Free Enterprise Forum continue to be a strong voice in our community.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.

Photo Credits- Charlottesville Tomorrow

Proposed US29 Western Bypass Extension is Too Short – and Too Long

By. Neil Williamson, President

The Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is discussing a conceptual plan to extend the US29 Western Bypass.  This concept is being presented at their September 26th meeting and will be discussed as a part of the Long Rage Transportation Plan for the next couple of months.  Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Sean Tubbs has the story in this morning’s Daily Progress

The Free Enterprise Forum believes that this is a great topic for long term discussion but the project is both too long and too short.

The core benefits of this proposed extension are two fold.  First it would provide improved access to one of our economic development assets the Charlottesville Albemarle Airport (CHO) and it would ease congestion on North US29.

To accomplish the first benefit the road is too long.  A singular project connecting the existing airport to the federally funded Western Bypass [with the ability to later be extended] would be significantly less expensive and, considering the economic development benefit,  would be more likely to be competitive for the ever decreasing transportation funding dollars.

To accomplish the second task of truly easing traffic on US29, the proposed extension is too short.  As any one who drives this stretch of US29 regularly knows, congestion starts north of the Greene County line.  A wider lens is required to see the potential of a longer Western Bypass Extension that would rejoin US29 somewhere north and/or west of the US29/US33 intersection.

While the current MPO is limited by the geographic boundaries of Albemarle County’s growth area, it seems clear that in the next census, Greene County will be forced to join the MPO.  Such an MPO Expansion will most likely take place long before the US29 Western Bypass Extension would be full funded.  Prudent planning would suggest the MPO factor this reality into their planning.

The Free Enterprise Forum calls on the MPO in considering their long term transportation planning to consider the potentiality for both a shorter AND a longer US29 Western Bypass Extension.

Sometimes two projects are better than one.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.

US29 Bypass Faces “Obstacle Illusions”

FORUM WATCH EDITORIAL

By Neil Williamson, President

For the last eight weeks, well funded transportation obstructionist organizations have attempted to hijack the US29 Bypass Environmental Assessment review process by changing the dynamics and falsely suggesting this week’s input session is a hurdle that must be crossed to allow the EA to move forward. 

In addition these groups are using a classic form of rhetorical argument where if you do not like the answer change the question.  This creation of “Obstacle Illusions” is confusing and misinforming the public. 

Please let me explain.

According to their website on September 27th the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will be holding a meeting to:

provide the public an opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment on the Route 29 Charlottesville Bypass project.

The meeting will be held at Jack Jouett Middle School from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. in an open forum format. The school is located at 210 Lambs Lane, Charlottesville, VA 22901.

Written and oral comments will be taken at the meeting. Written comments may also be submitted by Oct. 9, 2012, to Ms. Angel Deem, Environmental Division, Virginia Department of Transportation, 1221 E. Broad Street,  Richmond, VA 23219, or by email to Route29BypassEA@VDOT.Virginia.gov.

Please put “Route 29 Charlottesville Bypass Environmental Assessment” in the subject line.

It is important to note, this public input session is not mandated by Federal or State code it is an additional step VDOT is taking at the request of local officials.  The goal of the meeting is to accept feedback from the public regarding the EA.

The EA seeks to answer the question of measuring the environmental impacts, the metrics used and, if the measurements exceed acceptable levels, what mitigation will be completed.

In print and television advertisements, opponents have suggested this is the opportunity to speak out against the US 29 Bypass.  These advertisements suggest the public meeting is a hearing on the bypass itself creating an “obstacle illusion” that the outcome of this input meeting could stop the bypass. 

One Letter to the Editor suggested “The bypass will operate to our detriment for the next 50 years in terms of meeting future needs.” (John Martin Daily Progress September 24th).  Clearly Mr. Martin is not directing his comments to the EA but rather the decision to fund the roadway.

The Piedmont Group of the Sierra Club chose to focus their opposition on materials that might be permitted to be transported on the proposed roadway rather than the roadway’s direct environmental impacts:

“Presence of nuclear industries at Lynchburg suggests that radioactive materials and other goods related to nuclear industries will be transported on the Route 29 Bypass if it is built.”

Really???? The nuclear card??  And  if the Bypass is not built wouldn’t those same materials go right through the heart of the community???????

It seems equally ironic that  Morgan Butler of  the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) suggests in his September 23rd Daily Progress Letter to the Editor that  the focus of the September 27th meeting should be on roadway design not the Environmental Assessment.

In a fun, albeit inaccurate,  slide show on the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) website, Field Officer Jeff Werner suggests that six of the  “doable” projects discussed in Places29 may not be funded if the bypass goes forward.   Werner is well aware that three of the six fixes (North US29 lane expansion, Hillsdale Drive Extension, “Best Buy” Ramp) are already moving forward with actions by the Secretary of Transportation or the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) 

The inconvenient truth (to borrow a phrase from Al Gore) is that those opposed to the road can’t argue with the methods and metrics included in VDOT’s Environmental Assessment.  Instead they are rallying support and donations on a false premise regarding the meeting’s purpose. 

We fully anticipate the majority of participants in this week’s meeting will focus incorrectly on the roadway design due to the opponents’ aggressive advertising efforts. 

It is unfortunate that thanks to road blocking groups fanning the flames of self serving “obstacle illusion”, VDOT will likely not get  informed public comment on their well written Environmental Assessment.

Respectfully Submitted,

Neil Williamson

**Editor’s Note 9/27/12 John Martin Letter to the Editor quote corrected -nw. 

Neil Williamson is the President of The Free Enterprise Forum, a privately funded public policy organization covering the City of Charlottesville as well as Albemarle, Greene, Fluvanna, Louisa and  Nelson County.